It’s quite likely that the difference comes down to the savings from running 2 fewer GDDR5 RAM chips.Īs for load power draw, having seen our temperature results the actual power figures should not be a surprise. The GTX 470 was rated for 33W, so it’s safe to say the GTX 465 is close to that. While NVIDIA didn’t give the GTX 465 an official idle power draw, we’re measuring it at 1W less than the GTX 470. Next we have idle power consumption, measuring the total power consumption of our GPU testbench. Even the gap between the GTX 4 drops quite a bit, with only 13C separating the two. Overall things are better for the GTX 465 here though, as it’s better than roughly half of our cards here, placing amongst the Radeon HD 4890, 4850, and only a hair above the 5870 and GTX 285. This still makes it the 3 rd hottest single-GPU card we have tested, tieing with the Radeon HD 3870 and coming in 24C hotter than the 5850, a card it underperforms in this game.įurMark has a similar showing, with the GTX 465 coming in 3C cooler than the GTX 470. Under Crysis that 2C advantage over the GTX 470 holds, with temperatures peaking at just 91C. Moving on to load temperatures, we can begin to see the price of using a GPU with a higher core voltage. This puts it squarely in the same territory as the GTX 200 series. Even with the same idle voltage and same cooler as the GTX 470, the GTX 465 delivers a slight surprise: it ends up idling at 2C under the GTX 470.
Moving on to our charts, we’ll start with idle temperatures. So going by voltage alone, it’s clear that we’re not going to see the GTX 465 receive a huge benefit in terms of power, temperature, & noise. This is why there’s only a 15W TDP difference between the two cards: NVIDIA “spent” their savings getting lesser GF100 GPUs in to products. With fewer functional units, the GTX 465 has a greater tolerance for high-voltage chips and it looks like this is where NVIDIA is sending some of them as a result. From this we can infer that NVIDIA is not only holding back chips with damaged functional units, but also chips that run but just take too much voltage (and ultimately power) to do so. NVIDIA is dealing with some very tight thermal and power requirements on the GTX 480 and 470 – getting a 3 billion transistor chip to not run amok drawing power is hard work.
875v, this means it takes a 50% greater voltage increase over idle to bring our GTX 465 to load compared to our GTX 470. This is only a 4% increase in core voltage overall, but as GF100 has an idle voltage of. Our GTX 480 and 470 samples have a load core voltage of 0.959v and 0.962v respectively according to GPU-Z, while our GTX 465 from Zotec is a good 0.04v higher at 1.025v. Neither card is of the silent type, though the Radeon was considerably noisier when running 3d applications.In terms of core voltage the GTX 465 ends up being a notable outlier.
#Nvidia geforce gtx 275 temperature full#
The fan on the GeForce is more moderate, making more noise than the Radeon at idle but remaining quieter under full load. The GeForce GTX 275 reaches a toasty 78 degrees under load, but will cool down to 41 degrees at idle. Then at idle the fan almost turns off, so the GPU doesn't drop below 50 degrees.
The Radeon HD 4890 is a noisy little thing under load, though the screaming blower fan manages to keep the GPU relatively cool at just 69 degrees.
We tested both cards using their standard reference coolers and as such these results will reflect those of any Radeon HD 4890 or GeForce GTX 275 using the stock cooler designed by ATI and Nvidia, respectively (about 80% of the products on offer). The Radeon HD 4890 was slightly more power hungry at idle, using 16 watts more when compared to the GeForce GTX 275. Relatively speaking, both the Radeon HD 4890 and GeForce GTX 275 use very little power with just 3 watts separating them under full load.